The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

Loading ...

Loading ...

This story appears in the {{article.article.magazine.pretty_date}} issue of {{article.article.magazine.pubName}}. Subscribe

When I go to a hockey game at Madison Square Garden, I have limited choice in how much I want to spend to go. I can pay hundreds of dollars a game for seatson the glass, or I can pay $50 for the cheapest seats in the arena, or I can pay something in between. If I want to see the game, I accept one of the options the Garden offers me, and my ticket money is what helps to fund renovations, player salaries and administrative costs.

Going to the racetrack is different. Admission to Aqueduct is free; getting into Belmont or Saratoga costs $3, pretty much the same as it cost a century ago. Probably a bit luxurious then, it’s a total bargain now.

The gate isn’t what funds racing’s salaries, operating expenses, and purse money for the owners, jockeys, and trainers. What funds racing is the money that goes through the betting windows, and while everybody has to pay the $3 to get in, beyond that, you don’t have to spend a single dime to watch the show go on.

And that’s a problem. Horse racing is an expensive show, and handle—the money wagered—has been declining steadily. People are still gambling, but lotteries and casinos offer other, and often easier, ways to bet.

At the 2011 Jockey Club Round Table in Saratoga Springs, New York, Michael Lamb and Dan Singer of McKinsey and Company presented the results of a study commissioned by the Jockey Club, which is the breed registry for Thoroughbred horses in this country, Canada, and Puerto Rico. It controls which Thoroughbreds are permitted to register and be raced, and while it has limited authority over racetracks’ day-to-day operations, it does exert influence in the sport.

Based on the results of a McKinsey consumer survey of 1,800 current potential fans, Lamb and Singer reported that people don’t gamble on horse racing is it’s too complicated; they don’t understand and are overwhelmed by the information provided in track programs and other past performances.

This summer, America’s Best Racing, a “multi-media new fan development and awareness-building platform” sponsored by the Jockey Club, launched what it calls Racing 101, designed to educate track patrons about wagering and encourage them to gamble while at the races.

Photo credit Penelope P. Miller/America's Best Racing

Racing 101 set up tents at several major racing events this summer, including the Haskell Invitational at Monmouth Park in Oceanport, New Jersey; the Travers Stakes at Saratoga Race Course in upstate New York; and the Pacific Classic at Del Mar near San Diego.

Staffed by professional handicappers and race analysts and equipped with betting windows and closed circuit televisions of the races, the tents offered fans the chance to get personalized betting advice, to learn to read past performances, and to participate in Q&A’s with jockeys and trainers.

One of Racing 101’s fan educators is Brian Nadeau, who handicaps New York racing for Horseplayernow.com (and is the Triple Crown race analyst at Brooklyn Backstretch, my website). One of the strengths of the program, according to him, is individualized wagering instruction.

“We try to figure out what kind of a bettor you are,” he said on Travers Day at Saratoga. “The first thing we usually ask is: how much do you want to bet on each race, and how much do you want to win?

“Some people just want to win; they’re happy with a $4 show bet. Some people want to try to win $1,000 and don’t care if they lose $50 trying.”